Tuned In

NBC-Comcast: A TV Deal for the Post-TV Era

NBC
30 ROCK -- "The Problem Solvers" Episode 405 -- Pictured: (l-r) Padma Lakshmi as herself, Alec Baldwin as Jack Donaghy -- NBC Photo: Ali Goldstein

Giant cable-TV provider Comcast has reached a deal with GE this morning to take over giant entertainment company NBC Universal. This means big changes ahead for 30 Rock’s Jack Donaghy, who will have to adapt his core competencies from selling microwave ovens to pushing upgrades on DVR cable boxes. But what does it mean for you as a TV viewer?

In the short term, not much; probably not even that much in the medium term. (For starters, the deal faces an approval process which could take a year.) In the longer term, it says a few things about what the TV business is becoming, and what “TV” will mean in the future:

* For starters, it reminds us how small a part of the package what we recently knew as “TV”—free, over-the-air broadcast entertainment—now is. Comcast, a cable company whose interest is in finding new ways to sell viewers media, be it cable packages or movies on demand, is especially interested in NBCU’s cable and theatrical properties. The Peacock, Jay Leno, The Office, et al., are more or less being thrown in the deal like complimentary floor mats in a new car. Keep in mind that one big reason GE bought NBC way back when was because broadcast TV was valued as a reliable cash cow. Not so much anymore.

*  So what replaces “TV”? Well, more TV, but in different forms. The way mass entertainment worked for a long time was that there were genres that were defined by the machines and venues you used to experience them: a “movie” was what you saw on a big screen in a special building, “TV” was what you saw on a screen in your living room, “radio” came out of a box, etc. Now all the screens and means we have for distributing the same stuff render those distinctions increasingly moot. What Comcast and others envision is a world in which you buy the things you want to see and experience (TV shows, sporting events, movies), when you want to see them, on whichever device you prefer to use—and, of course, you pay and pay and pay for them.

* Speaking of pay and pay and pay: this deal is about online media, too, and the hope of getting you to pay for watching entertainment that way. Hulu is partly owned by NBC, and there’s already been talk of making that a pay service.

* And the movies? This is more speculative, but there is increasing talk about monkeying with the “window”—that is, the amount of time you have to wait after a movie is in theaters before you can see it on demand, download it, rent it, buy it, etc. Take away the window, and the next Twilight movie becomes a high-profile Friday-night TV show. Now, there are plenty of people arguing for preserving the window, but it’s already started to erode for some movies. And what studio might be especially aggressive about experimenting with it? Why, a troubled movie studio… like Universal.

* This is also speculative, but the NBC affiliates—already chafing at how they were thrown under the bus by the decision to give them a weaker news lead-in with Jay Leno—probably have even more reason to be nervous about their place, their importance and their leverage in the Comcast universe. Comcast is a cable company, and is probably not inclined to be too sentimental about the legacy or value of local TV stations.

* Jeff Zucker remains bulletproof. For now, anyway, Though the NBCU chief has been kicked around by TV critics and industry observers for the way he’s run the flagship TV network into fourth place over the past decade, he’ll stay in charge of the enterprise for the time being. And whatever you say about his programming acumen, the deal itself fits with his business vision, namely, that the TV business is now mainly the cable business.

Having said all this, is the merger a good deal? How the hell do I know? I work for Time Warner: you’ve seen how much we know about smart synergistic media mergers! Seriously, the thing I will say is that whether or not the Comcast deal specifically will be a success, it does at least grow out of the right sense of where entertainment media is heading. Of course, so, in a general sense, did the AOL and Time Warner merger, in that it recognized the importance of the Internet: the problem was deciding that AOL was the right company to take advantage of it, and grossly overvaluing AOL in the deal.

NBC and Comcast, in other words, probably have the right idea about where media is going. That doesn’t mean this is the best means to get there. Now they’ll just have to unravel the tangled cable of this deal, and see where it leads.

Related Topics: Business News, comcast, mergers, NBC
  • Latest on Entertainment

    Sony Computer Entertainment

    The 7 Most Promising PlayStation Vita Launch Games

    New system launch games are usually pretty dismal — look at what happened to the Nintendo 3DS — but the PS Vita’s looks unusually promising. Here’s a rundown of the seven Vita games we’re most looking forward to (and why).

    Cancel the Oscars, Air the After-PartiesSlate

    President Obama Made America A Mixtape

    According to his Spotify playlist, President Obama Likes Ricky Martin and REO Speedwagon

  • alaskanturkey

    Any thoughts on the impact of the merger on TV channel availability and future mergers between cable companies and production companies?
    .
    Josh Silver over at Huffpost had an article the other day on the merger arguing against it with some interesting points – http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-silver/too-big-to-block-why-obam_b_356826.html , but I have no idea if they’re valid concerns.
    .
    Over at Dailykos, the group seems paranoid that the tier structuring of cable networks will eliminate MSNBC from many stations around the country. But it seems like if Comcast now owns MSNBC they would want to promote the channel right? But does that mean Verizon/Cox/whatever would be more likely to remove MSNBC from their available channels?

  • falcon307

    I am concerned about the anti-trust issues of this deal.

    I am a “forever” customer of DirecTV and will “never, ever again” have any dealings with Comcast.

    See the DirecTV-Comcast history with the Versus channel for an example of my concerns. (Versus is one of Comcast’s current channels. Following an impasse over the price of Versus to DirecTV, its largest competitor, DirecTV has not carried Versus for several months.) As Comcast increases its media content holdings, it will have more pricing power over its distribution competitors, such as DirecTV and the other cable providers. Comcast’s price for Versus to DirecTV could be construed as just their first excercise of monopoly power.

    I hope that the regulators do not approve the deal, but I fully expect that they will.

  • http://twitter.com/poniewozik James Poniewozik

    I can only speculate, but I would note that my own cable company is Time Warner Cable, whom, despite their corporate ties to Time Warner and thus TIME, I have never had anything good to say about. But they have long carried Fox News and MSNBC, despite CNN’s ownership by TW. That’s not to say that conflicts don’t create problems, but they generally have not been that blatant.

  • Tom Shaw

    “the NBC affiliates—already chafing at how they were thrown under the bus by the decision to give them a weaker news lead-in with Jay Leno—probably have even more reason to be nervous about their place”

    It’s much more than that. Much of the chattering before the merger indicated that Comcast might well have to divest themselves of their owned & operated affiliates to comply with anti-trust regulations.

    This is completely avoiding the long term issue that those affiliates have, in the past thirty years, gone from being a major profit center (why the networks acquired so many affiliates, after all) to bordering on money pits.

    So yes, Comcast may well be forced to drop their O&O affiliates, the affiliates aren’t making (much, if any) money, and Comcast’s business model sees affiliates as the enemy. Nervous is an understatement.

    “Jeff Zucker remains bulletproof.”

    I’m not so sure he isn’t being kept around just to lead to an orderly transition, but the truth is, his views on the importance of cable vs. broadcast are being proven out.

    As absurd as it seems today, in twenty years Zucker could be viewed as a visionary for moving NBC to the cable model while, say, CBS is saddled with old world media albatrosses (billboards, radio, etc.)…

  • nycgeoff

    Off topic, you need to reintroduce yourself to Rick Stengel again, he called you “Joe” on MSNBC this morning.

  • http://tvtattle.com/2009/12/03/3863/ — TV Tattle

    [...] 3, 2009 NBC's sale to Comcast means the devaluation of free TV This morning's 13.75 million deal is mostly about NBC Universal's cable assets. As James [...]

  • rhys1882

    I understand the concern about anti-trust issues, and I think those are relevant concerns. However, the blatant anti-trust activity people seem to mostly be concerned about is highly unlikely. Why? Because doing something like refusing to carry ESPN to remove the competition of NBC Sports and Versus is BLATANT anti-trust behavior. That would be an extremely quick lawsuit.

    What I find interesting is that by purchasing NBCU, Comcast is somewhat insulating itself from a possible move to a-la-carte cable/TV packages, which I think is where things are eventually heading towards. The companies that stand to lose the most if a-la-carte TV becomes a reality are TV service provider companies, and the companies that could potentially gain are TV content providers. Instead of 500 channels for $100 a month, you could get 20 channels you want for $50. Any way you slice it, the service providers are getting less money. But an a-la-carte option could potentially allow individual channels to get higher carriage fees. Potentially there could be two tiers of carriage fees. One fee for bulk $100 500 channel service, and a higher fee for the 20 channel $50 service. By owning content and service, if one pie gets chopped down the other could grow.

  • http://soappolls.com/news-porizkova-alexanderbowler-comcast-gross NEWS: Porizkova, Alexander/Bowler, Comcast, Gross | Soap Polls

    [...] Porizkova, Alexander/Bowler, Comcast, Gross Thursday, December 3rd, 2009 | Television | jessica NBC-Comcast: A TV Deal for the Post-TV Era In the short term, the deal may not mean much; probably not even that much in the medium term. (For [...]

  • http://www.besttelevisionshows.com/what-does-the-nbccomcast-deal-mean-for-you/ What does the NBC/Comcast deal mean for you? | Best Television Shows

    [...] could mean to you, the viewer. For instance, Comcast, a cable company, may have purchased NBC to “devalue” free TV, much in the same way Judge Doom from Who Framed Roger Rabbit? bought the Red Car company so he [...]

  • http://bestnewsdirect.info/?p=531 What does the NBC/Comcast deal mean for you? | Best News Direct

    [...] could mean to you, the viewer. For instance, Comcast, a cable company, may have purchased NBC to “devalue” free TV, much in the same way Judge Doom from Who Framed Roger Rabbit? bought the Red Car company so he [...]

  • http://jingleyanqui.wordpress.com Jingle

    In my household, almost everyone use internet more than watching TV, if we ever use the television, it would be watching a rented movie for unique taste…

    I got out of patience watching TV since the content may not always appealing to my personal view, not want to see commercials..

    Appreciating Fears
    http://www.jingleyanqiu.wordpress.com

    Have a Fun Weekend!

  • http://internet-pro-tools.com internetprotools

    The best tv deal to get is satellite tv for pc and you don’t have to pay monthly costs either. http://www.computeruser.com/blogs/entry/satellite-tv-for-pc-watch-satellite-tv-on-your-pc/

blog comments powered by Disqus